99% of John's public positions are reverse-engineered (perhaps the only engineering he's ever done) to appeal to his bases of support: people willing to accept him as a woman, and people willing to accept him as a feminist Joan of Arc. I do think we've seen enough glimpses of his thought process to see some things he really believes though.
- "Tech" (as in Silicon Valley brogrammer startups) is the most important part of the American economy, and a region's prosperity depends on attracting and developing tech businesses. Government should be actively promoting this.
- The government should generally keep its hands off the internet... but also be available as the "ultimate backchannel" to punish bad actors.
- Laws would be better if they were written by technical experts - such as himself.
- A good legislator is one who can work across the aisle to enact compromise legislation. (John's gotten smacked down more than once for variants of this by his rabid-left followers - I think he might actually be slipping up and speaking his mind)
- Every policy that matters ought to be set in Washington DC, not at the state or local level.
I think you're right, but all of these are also ultimately "Pro-Brianna" stances, and are espoused only in circumstances that favor her. These aren't real beliefs she's incorporated into her life, which causes me to question their sincerity. There's no follow-through, or any mettle to her convictions, which forces me to conclude that they are also just things she's saying to say them. In order:
-Bri left her tech startup because it wasn't making her any money, so clearly she doesn't believe it holds the future she claims.
-"The government should stay out of the internet except when I want a personal army" is an intrinsically paradoxical viewpoint. It is not a value or a position; it's a childish tantrum.
-She has yet to show basic knowledge of how laws are passed, who has the authority to institute what, and what body of government has what kind of authority. I would otherwise agree with her position on expert negotiated laws, save for the fact she clearly doesn't know what she means by this.
-There is no recorded instance of Bri following through on, or indeed being open to a compromise. She has paid token lip service to the idea of "reaching across the aisle", but is hostile, belittling, and dismissive in any instance where she's had the opportunity to confront an opposing view.
-I've yet to see evidence that Bri's knowledge of government extends to the point she's even
aware of how local, state, and federal government are supposed to interact. She appears to view it as some kind of gentlemen's agreement where the feds can just step in wherever with no oversight.
